People v. Frias CA2/8

Filed 10/23/24 P. v. Frias CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B329215

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA150959 v.

DANIEL FRIAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Roger Ito, Judge. Affirmed. Benjamin Owens, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Amanda V. Lopez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________

A jury convicted Daniel Frias of first degree murder and found true several aggravating circumstances and firearm enhancements. After rival gang members carjacked and “pistol-whipped” him at a Jack in the Box, Frias planned his revenge with two others. Frias entered the home of a young “fool” he believed to be one of the rivals while a compatriot robbed two people in front of the home. Frias shot the assumed rival dead in a hallway, emptying his firearm and shooting at close range, in front of people Frias believed were the victim’s family. Frias admitted these acts on tape and said he felt no remorse. In fact, he felt better after the killing and only was remorseful that the victim, or someone else, “made me look like a bitch.” We do not detail additional evidence because Frias’s appeal challenges just one aspect of his sentencing. The trial court sentenced Frias in January 2023. This was a full year after the effective date of Senate Bill No. 81 (2021- 2022 Reg. Sess.), which amended Penal Code section 1385 to empower courts to dismiss enhancements in furtherance of justice and added a list of mitigating circumstances heavily favoring dismissal to guide this determination. (See People v. Walker (2024) 16 Cal.5th 1024, 1030–1031 (Walker); Pen. Code, § 1385, subd. (c).) All further statutory citations are to the Penal Code. Frias’s sentencing also took place five years after the effective date of Senate Bill No. 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.), which amended section 12022.53 to enable courts to strike firearm enhancements. (See People v. Lipscomb (2022) 87 Cal.App.5th 9, 15–16.)